C/D picks M3 over GT-R in latest comparo
06-02-2008, 08:07 AM
#1
The Prototype
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C/D picks M3 over GT-R in latest comparo
Its on news stand ,the article is not online as of yet.
The July issue of C/D has a shootout between the 911 Turbo, M3, and GT-R.
The M3 came in first, and though I've been a little critical of how the M3 has evolved over the past few generations (into a hefty lump), in this group I think it probably would have garnered my top pick as well. It's the lightest of the three, it has a high-revving naturally aspirated motor, it's FR, and dimensionally, it's relatively compact. The GT-R was fastest around the short (1.5mile) road course, but from the comments it sounds like it was the least engaging of the three to drive. On top of that, the car they tested seems to have had its share of mechanical glitches (not to mention it was quite a bit slower than the 911 Turbo as well as the last GT-R tested - 1/4 mile was 12.1@115mph). They mentioned that the car they tested used the production-spec for launch control, but I can't imagine that launching 100rpm lower (4400rpm vs 4500rpm) would result in a 9mph lower trap speed.
I figured the production spec would run a tad slower then there all out test mule.
Goes to show balance still is king over dominate power. Hopefully the Vspec version of the GT-R with its lighter weight and 500HP under it hood, will turn the tables on the well balanced M3.
The July issue of C/D has a shootout between the 911 Turbo, M3, and GT-R.
The M3 came in first, and though I've been a little critical of how the M3 has evolved over the past few generations (into a hefty lump), in this group I think it probably would have garnered my top pick as well. It's the lightest of the three, it has a high-revving naturally aspirated motor, it's FR, and dimensionally, it's relatively compact. The GT-R was fastest around the short (1.5mile) road course, but from the comments it sounds like it was the least engaging of the three to drive. On top of that, the car they tested seems to have had its share of mechanical glitches (not to mention it was quite a bit slower than the 911 Turbo as well as the last GT-R tested - 1/4 mile was 12.1@115mph). They mentioned that the car they tested used the production-spec for launch control, but I can't imagine that launching 100rpm lower (4400rpm vs 4500rpm) would result in a 9mph lower trap speed.
I figured the production spec would run a tad slower then there all out test mule.
Goes to show balance still is king over dominate power. Hopefully the Vspec version of the GT-R with its lighter weight and 500HP under it hood, will turn the tables on the well balanced M3.
06-02-2008, 12:18 PM
#6
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
GT-R > M3.
C/D must not have gotten the memo...
C/D must not have gotten the memo...
06-02-2008, 01:44 PM
#11
The Prototype
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look at the Rx-8, went up against the Mustang,Audi TT, 350Z, all those cars on paper and in real world applications, pretty much match if not exceed the RX-8 in all areas, yet the RX-8 is the car that comes out on top as the most enjoyable to drive out of the bunch. Another car(RX-8) that is all about balance, and when i say balance, I meen the complete package.Styling,performance,value, and fun factor.
Maybe BMW and Mazda has got something, were other manufactures are missing the mark? Why do one thing great , when you can excell in all things well.
06-02-2008, 02:53 PM
#15
too pretty? and you drive an rx8? 
the m3 is a brute compared to the happy smiling rx8.
also, i hate this new m3. what happened to bmws legacy of inline engines? :/
the e46 m3 was a real classic, and it will be missed. i hate how each generation of bmw is bigger and heavier than the last. only bmws i'd drive are an e30 3 series, love those cars. e46 m3, or a z3 m coupe/vert (with the s52 engine.)
heavy cars suck. anything significantly over 3000lbs is too heavy in my book. 3k lbs is a target weight to shoot for.
the m3 is a brute compared to the happy smiling rx8.
also, i hate this new m3. what happened to bmws legacy of inline engines? :/
the e46 m3 was a real classic, and it will be missed. i hate how each generation of bmw is bigger and heavier than the last. only bmws i'd drive are an e30 3 series, love those cars. e46 m3, or a z3 m coupe/vert (with the s52 engine.)
heavy cars suck. anything significantly over 3000lbs is too heavy in my book. 3k lbs is a target weight to shoot for.
06-02-2008, 03:11 PM
#16
zoom zoom
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
let's not forget that gt-r lapped nurburgring nordschleife in 7:29, 2 seconds behind the zonda f and 3 seconds quicker than the 997 gt2. sure, the m3 might in some respects be *better* and more easy to live with than the gt-r, but which one do i want to own myself? the gt-r in a heartbeat. for one, there's definitely a whole lot more mystique and desirability (for the right crowd) with the (skyline) gt-r name than the m3. then there's the david-vs-goliath-factor. sure it's ugly, but porsche 911's have always seemed ugly to me as well, so why not out-ugly the other uglies? there's something about an ugly car made by a mass production company that can whip small volume high dollar hand-built machines.
as for the m3, many would say e36 and e46 m3 were the best, especially the e36. personally, it would've deeply impressed me if bmw developed the new m3 into a lean and lithe high performance car via light weight and flawless dynamics instead of shoehorning in an m5 v-10-minus-2-cylinders. by doing that, all bmw did was joining the fray of german uber muscle cars like audi and amg. i know the new m3 motor is actually lighter than e46 motor, but still, the definitive bmw not having an inline-6 is kinda sad
what gt-r is is basically a playstation on wheels; computers everywhere controlling everything. it is what it is, and it's very good at doing that. m3 isn't really what it used to be anymore
as for the m3, many would say e36 and e46 m3 were the best, especially the e36. personally, it would've deeply impressed me if bmw developed the new m3 into a lean and lithe high performance car via light weight and flawless dynamics instead of shoehorning in an m5 v-10-minus-2-cylinders. by doing that, all bmw did was joining the fray of german uber muscle cars like audi and amg. i know the new m3 motor is actually lighter than e46 motor, but still, the definitive bmw not having an inline-6 is kinda sad
what gt-r is is basically a playstation on wheels; computers everywhere controlling everything. it is what it is, and it's very good at doing that. m3 isn't really what it used to be anymore
06-02-2008, 03:18 PM
#18
Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Green Side, yo!
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rx8 is not pretty.......it's infact pretty ugly to me! It's short and tiny..and what's up with the sucide doors???.. I bought it cuz of the handling..n rotary engine...I've always loved rotary engines..I didn't buy it cuz of the look...........
If I was looking for a look, I would buy a used NSX or S2000!
Do you know why a lot of pretty girls drive BMWs?? Cuz they think they're pretty and look good driving them......I have 5 female friends and 3 of them own bimmer coupes....and they bought them soley for the look.........
M3 may has a lot more power and has better handling than a 3 series coupe but it still is a bimmer and looks like one......there!
The new ones are even more rounded and prettier now...
So you bought the rx8 for the look????
If I was looking for a look, I would buy a used NSX or S2000!
Do you know why a lot of pretty girls drive BMWs?? Cuz they think they're pretty and look good driving them......I have 5 female friends and 3 of them own bimmer coupes....and they bought them soley for the look.........
M3 may has a lot more power and has better handling than a 3 series coupe but it still is a bimmer and looks like one......there!
The new ones are even more rounded and prettier now...
So you bought the rx8 for the look????
06-02-2008, 03:32 PM
#19
Administrator
iTrader: (7)
where's Detrich? I would have thought he'd have posted in here by now. 
06-02-2008, 03:33 PM
#20
幹他媽!
i'd like to test drive both cars before making a decision. both cars have their pro's & con's.
my gutt feeling is that the bmw is probably more refined and balanced- given bmw's history with the M. but, u'll probably see more M3's on the road than GT-Rs, which makes the nissan more unique.
my gutt feeling is that the bmw is probably more refined and balanced- given bmw's history with the M. but, u'll probably see more M3's on the road than GT-Rs, which makes the nissan more unique.
06-02-2008, 04:17 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C/D nearly always pick BMW over any challenger.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqwKJHJ-s5w
Watch from about 5:15 on, where the M3 brakes disappear.
Give me the GTR any day over a M3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqwKJHJ-s5w
Watch from about 5:15 on, where the M3 brakes disappear.
Give me the GTR any day over a M3.
06-02-2008, 06:32 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: University of Maryland
Posts: 2,510
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
the M3 is a very nice car, it outperforms the earlier M3s overall. 1 publication likes the M3 better than the GT-R out of dozens that have given the GT-R the nod. I dont think nissan is loosing any sleep over this.
06-02-2008, 06:59 PM
#24
n00b post whore
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C/D nearly always pick BMW over any challenger.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqwKJHJ-s5w
Watch from about 5:15 on, where the M3 brakes disappear.
Give me the GTR any day over a M3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqwKJHJ-s5w
Watch from about 5:15 on, where the M3 brakes disappear.
Give me the GTR any day over a M3.
But yes, C&D are notoriously unwavering BMW fanboys.
For myself, I wouldn't mind owner either one in the least, but the fact that a $65K M3 looks very much like it's $40K counterpart is sort of disappointing. The GT-R on the other hand looks like nothing else and boasts even more power.
